To strive towards a pure form of knowledge so that we don't have to believe the unbelievable and accept the unacceptable.

Dimakatso Discourse – Part II

You can support me and my research expeditions by making a donation through my company Afrodata Solutions via Paypal or you can buy my books on Amazon. Siyabonga ka khulu (Zulu for we are the grateful ones!). Badimo ke bao! Thokoza Makhosi!

Enter Dimakatso discourse with the creator. This is part II of the discourse. Dimakatso has gone through the process of being accepted into the military academy. She is currently going through her formal training. She had an excellent discourse with the creator the last time and this has had a paradigm shifting impact in her life. Her mood has improved greatly and she feels like she is on top of the world. She does however have some lingering questions arising out of her Part I discourse with the creator. This conversation with the creator is already in progress:

Dimakatso: My supreme creator. I am greatly honoured to be here. I have some questions arising out of our last discourse. Do you know how a human feels or does a human have to express her state of mind before you can gain access into her state of mind? I ask this question because you were only able to assist me after I had expressed my request. I then started thinking afterwards as to what was going to happen to me if I had not made an explicit request for your assistance? I am glad though that I was humble enough to come in front of you to lay my heart bare and you assisted me greatly.

The Creator: As creators, it is important that we don’t interfere in the lives of our creations. In this case, if a human is thinking of something, I cannot interfere. Sensing and acting on their internal thoughts would constitute interference which is contrary to the rules that govern the creators. However, if the human expresses a sentiment that requires the attention of the creator then that particular creator has the legitimate right to listen to that sentiment. In this case, if you had not explicitly requested the assistance of the creator, I was not going to interfere.

Dimakatso: Even if I was suffering? You would just let me suffer while you could be helping me?

The Creator: You are designed to be the master of your own destiny. By interfering, even if for a good reason, it would violate the sanctity of the rules we live by. Humans on earth have an adage that says “The road to hell is paved with good intentions“. This adage demonstrates that good intentions are not enough to put us on the right path. We need to have a valid and objective reason to carry out our good intentions otherwise it is like solving a problem that does not exist. Problem solving resources used without the authenticity of the dialectics are misplaced.

Even earthly beings understand the futility of solving a problem that doesn’t exist. Our policy is not to solve a problem that does not exist. If we interfered in your life in the absence of a formal request it would be like solving a problem that does not exist. By expressing a problem, it comes into existence and we are then in a position to get involved.

Dimakatso: You refer to the rules that govern the creators. What is it about the rules? Why is that important in this case?

The Creator: First and foremost, the rules are extremely important. They constitute an IPD (immutable prime directive). Moreover, the rules have a state of sanctity meaning that they cannot be broken without exception. The rules must be observed and upheld at all times. This is because the rules are the antithesis of disorder. This means that the rules eliminate and prevent chaos. The rules also govern relations in the universe. It is the absence of rules that creates and invites chaos.

These rules must also be internalized. It is not enough to profess the rules that you do not keep. You must actually live by the rules that you espouse. The adherence to the rules confirms your true belief. It is your true belief that brings you closer to your creator and the heavens.

The ancient Basotho have a powerful axiom that says: “Ngaka haeye Badimong le ditaola. Etshwanela hodisiya le ba setseng.” meaning the traditional surgeon does not return to the gods along with her instruments of geomancy. She must bequeath the geomancy to those left behind.” On the other hand, the Basotho’s axiomatic antonym declares another important rule: “Ngaka eka se siyi ditaola le bao ba dikgesang. Etla tshwanela hotsamaya le tsona. Ditla kgutla ka hokgutla hohong.” meaning the traditional surgeon cannot leave behind the sacred instruments of geomancy with those who despise them. In this case, the shaman shall have to take the geomancy with her. The geomancy shall return in a different form.

The reason for this rule is that the instruments of geomancy cannot be forced upon those who don’t appreciate them. This would violate a sacred maxim. The potential initiates must spontaneously gravitate towards the geomancy. They must be attracted enough to want to embrace the geomancy. They must develop an instinctive grasp of the geomancy. The same rules that apply here also apply to the creators.

Dimakatso: Wow! This is an amazing fact. Ditaola (The Instruments of Geomancy) cannot be left with those who despise them! This is profound because once the earthlings lose a shaman in their midst then it constitutes a great loss. Moreover, if they don’t have the instruments of geomancy the mere mortals will degrade and begin to suffer harsh cases of moral decay. They need the geomancy in order to heal and regain their cosmic resonance. In this way they shall develop a sense of moral code and be directed by the heavens.

Dimakatso: (continuing) You use plurality to refer to the creator. I thought there was only one creator but here you are talking about many creators. Are there many creators?

The Creator: Good question. There are many creators and this is why the rules are needed to ensure an orderly universe. The cosmos is also governed and bound by the sanctity of rules. Let’s take an example of a mouse and a snake. Suppose there was only one creator for everything. The creator creates the mouse and then looks at the mouse and says this mouse is beautiful. Afterwards, the same creator creates the snake. The snake then sees the mouse and destroys it in a flash. Doesn’t that constitute an antagonistic contradiction of life in which one creation on the one hand destroys another on the other?

This situation can be better explained by the fact that the creator of the mouse is not the same creator of the snake. The poor creatures are created by two different creators. This is the reason why there are many creators. If a creation from creator A is unable to defend itself against another creation from creator B then it is up to creator A to make design improvements to maximize the survival experience of her creation. This was the case when the mongoose approached me for assistance in this regard with respect to Masumu. Since then, Masumu has gained a new respect for the Mongoose.

Sometimes the creators appear to compete against each other. This apparent competition is similar to the apparent movement of the sun. The vigilant creator must ensure a better adaptation for her creation so that the creation is able to represent its creator well and fulfill the design goals of its existence.

Dimakataso: I didn’t know that there would be a competition in the realm of celestial creation. So the creators compete against each other? Isn’t competition a bad thing?

The Creator: Even though I used the word “compete” but actually it is a challenge. The creators are challenging each other for a better design and creation. As long as they challenge one another and improve their creative process then they are reducing the chaos in the universe. In fact, you may have a situation where one creator does the design and another does the actual creation or development. That is a matter of strategy. Those who adhere to the concept of many creators and many gods are referred to as polytheists whereas those who espouse the concept of one creator/god are known as monotheists. So what are you? A monotheist?

Dimakatso: I am a monotheist, I guess and I have been socialized in this way. I did know of polytheism because most of my people believe in many gods although the ruling powers officially subscribe to the concept of one creator.

The Creator: (interjecting) It does not matter whether you subscribe to monotheism or polytheism, your creator will always take care of you. You should however work towards polytheism because that is the true state of being. However as creators, we don’t punish you for an innocent ignorance.

Dimakatso: That is very kind of you. This means you don’t abandon us as a result of our philosophical persuasions.

The Creator: That is correct. We love and care for our creation. We are committed to their well-being and future success. This is important for us, so that we are there to support our creation no matter what.

Afterwards

After the conversation with the creator, Dimakatso returned to her military academy to rest for the day. This conversation was a much needed intellectual discourse. She is also feeling good that she is a participant in such an important discourse. She now has a direct access to a discourse with her creator and this is the greatest thing on the planet.

Like this:

Post navigation

2 thoughts on “Dimakatso Discourse – Part II”

Dimakatso and #FeesMustFall
The method must be patented…..
The timing of Dimakatso as an African Persona must be congratulated….
#FeesMustFall and Dimakatso are siblings in many respect….lets do some analysis….
The creator will through our ancestors respond appropriately…..